<html><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:arial, helvetica, sans-serif;font-size:12pt"><div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">As far as I'm aware, there is no such rule regarding print media in the US. Also, the Fairness Doctrine is basically, in my understanding, no longer in force in regard to broadcast media in the US. In other words, nothing legal prevents the NY Times or any newspaper in the US from taking a pro- or anti- cryonics stance. (Add to this, the NY Times does have opinion columns that do take controversial stances on issues. AFAIK, that paper is not obligated to provide equal column inches to opposing viewpoints.<VAR id=yui-ie-cursor></VAR>)</SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Regards,</SPAN></div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto"></SPAN> </div>
<div style="RIGHT: auto"><SPAN style="RIGHT: auto">Dan</SPAN></div>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: arial, helvetica, sans-serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt"><FONT size=2 face=Arial>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" class=ms__id633>
<DIV style="BORDER-BOTTOM: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0px; LINE-HEIGHT: 0; MARGIN: 5px 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 0px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; HEIGHT: 0px; FONT-SIZE: 0px; BORDER-TOP: #ccc 1px solid; BORDER-RIGHT: #ccc 1px solid; PADDING-TOP: 0px" class=hr contentEditable=false readonly="true"></DIV></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" class=ms__id633><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">From:</SPAN></B> BillK <pharos@gmail.com><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">To:</SPAN></B> ExI chat list <extropy-chat@lists.extropy.org><BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Sent:</SPAN></B> Tuesday, August 2, 2011 11:53 AM<BR><B><SPAN style="FONT-WEIGHT: bold">Subject:</SPAN></B> Re: [ExI] Robert Ettinger's obituary in NYT<BR></FONT><BR>On Tue, Aug 2, 2011 at 4:32 PM, David Lubkin wrote:<BR>> It seems to be more accurate than the Washington Post obit<BR>> but the tone is insulting.<BR>><BR>> Have any of the obits gone into why cryonics might be prudent?<BR>> Cryonics as an ambulance through time, the prospects of<BR>> molecular nanotechnology, and the assessment that a slim<BR>> chance of revival is better than none, could be presented in<BR>> lay terms in a sentence
apiece.<BR></DIV>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: times new roman, new york, times, serif; FONT-SIZE: 12pt" class=ms__id633>That's not the way public 'news' type organisations work.<BR><BR>If they did say why cryonics might be prudent, then for the sake of<BR>so-called 'balanced' reporting, they would also have to give equal<BR>column inches (or time) to explaining why cryonics is NOT a good idea.<BR><BR>They even do that with things like evolution or exploring space or<BR>regulating giant banks.<BR><BR>BillK</DIV></DIV></div></body></html>